Judge Herauf called the meeting to order. A motion was made by Judge Reich to approve the
February 8, 2013, minutes, as amended. The motion was seconded by Judge Reich, motion
carried.

Director’s Report

Mr. Pedersen shared there haven’t been any changes since the last meeting. He distributed the
Disproportionate Minority Contact Survey in Burleigh and Cass counties, which was conducted
by the Juvenile Justice Advisory Board. There were some recommendations for area law
enforcement, but few recommendations for the courts in both Cass and Burleigh studies.

After brief discussion, it was determined to discuss the results at the next Board meeting. Mr.
Hentzen will invite Lisa Jahner from the Association of Counties to the next meeting to discuss
the study in detail.

Mr. Pedersen also briefed the committee that the juvenile court director’s are finishing up the
2012 Juvenile Court Annual Report which will be finished by May 1, 2013. A copy will be
distributed to this Board, when finished.

E-Filing

Mr. Hentzen shared there are concerns from agencies in regards to e-filing format conditions.
Judge Herauf shared the discussion from the Court Technology Committee. If you are a non
party, you are exempted from the sentence numbering format. Judge Reich shared that Rule 3.5
does not exempt non parties. It doesn’t exclude them, but doesn’t include them. Documents
filed electronically in the district courts must be submitted through Odyssey and has a filing
requirement, which includes anybody who files a document in Odyssey. There is an exception
for documents by self represented litigants and prisoners. Judge Herauf will discuss the change
with Mike Hagburg for clarification.

Judge Mattson shared the clerks will not be rejecting the documents if they are not numbered
right now. There will be a period of transition, but there will be a time when the numbering
format will be required. With the mandatory filing right now, individuals need to get used to the
system and adjust the issues. There was also a discussion at the Court Technology Committee
with non party filings on whether it be certain experts in mental health filings, or GAL’s
submitting a document. The concern is where there are truncated deadlines going on in terms of
proceedings have some of those numbering requirements coming down on individuals who are
not a party. There is an increase in filings, due to it being mandatory.

Mr. Hentzen discussed with the juvenile court director’s on the need to canvass their offices and
determine how they would like to handle the GAL reports. Mr. Pedersen stated that in each unit
the GAL supervisors were to contact the Juvenile Court Director to make a decision based on
each unit procedure.

A motion was made by Judge Mattson to table this topic until the next meeting, seconded
by Justice Maring, motion approved.

Judge Herauf asked Mr. Pedersen to distribute information to the Policy Board regarding the
process of each unit, prior to the next meeting.

Mr. Pedersen also shared with regard to e-filing documents, there was a question with the
Department of Corrections and the Division of Juvenile Services and the documents they submit
to the juvenile court. The documents aren’t e-filed into the Odyssey system. Mr. Pedersen asked
what the Board suggests in regards to e-filing the documents. Mr. Pedersen asked if these are
documents that should be part of the formal Odyssey file. As of right now, the documents stay in
the juvenile court working file. These documents are something that could be used at
permanency hearings. Statute 27-21-05 states the preferred method is to be e-filing these
documents into Odyssey. Justice Maring shared the statute states the Department of Juvenile
Services shall report the findings to the committing juvenile court. It doesn’t state to the court
officers. Currently, they are being held in the working file of the juvenile court.

It was determined by the Board that the documents need to be filed as stated in Statute 27-21-05.
The juvenile court directors will make sure that these are being filed in Odyssey. If the referees
or judges need additional hearings, it will be up to them to request them.

Best Practices Manual

Judge Herauf shared he likes the format of the Best Practices Manual. Justice Maring questioned
the directive of the Board in regards to the Best Practices Manual.

Ms. Kringlie shared the history of the Best Practices Manual. When Judge Kleven was the chair
of the Juvenile Policy Board in 2006, she asked to form a sub-committee to try and bring practice
together, which was the goal of the manual. The first draft was approved by this group in 2008,
and then there were some updates. This is now the third time updates have been made to the
manual. This is more of an employee resource to give the employee directions on best practices
and is a great reference for new employees.

Justice Maring shared that she understood the manual to be an internal document for employee’s
to use to bring some consistency and directives amongst all of the districts throughout the state.

Ms. Kringlie stated if the direction is to not bring this manual back to the Policy Board,thatthe
juvenile court director’s could take over the updates and make it an internal employee type
manual. If there are policy concerns, the juvenile director’s will bring them back to the Board.

It was determined by this Board to have the juvenile court director’s maintain the updates of the
Best Practices Manual. The Best Practices Manual is maintained on the internal administrative
site and can be accessed by anyone in the court system.

A motion was made by Judge Mattson to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Judge Reich,
motion approved.